Technical Report 439

THE KEYWORD METHOD OF VOCABULARY ACQUISITION: AN EXPERIMENTAL EVALUATION

Douglas Griffith

ARI FIELD UNIT AT FORT HOOD, TEXAS

SELECTE DTIC D

JUL 2 11980

B

U. S. Army

Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences

January 1980

Approved for public release distrbution unlimited

_____80 7 10 043

No"-
U. S. ARMY RESEARCH INSTITUTE

FOR THE BEHAVIORAL AND SOCIAL SCIENCES

A Field Operating Agency under the Jurisdiction of the

Deputy Chief of Staff for Personnel

FRANKLIN A. HART

JOSEPH ZEIDNER Colonel, US Army

Technical Durcctor Commander

NOTICES

DISTRIBUTION Prornary distribution of this report has been mnade by ARI. Please address corresponldence

concerning distribution of reports to U S. Armny Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences.

ATTN: PERI-TP, 5001 Eisenhovwr Avenue, Alexandria, Virginia 22333.

FINAL DISPOSITION This report mayi be destroyed when it is no longer needed. Please do not return is to

the U. S. Army Research Instiftute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences.

NOT The findings in this report are not to be construed as an official Departrment of the Arrmy position.

unless so designated by other euthoriiad dlocuments.

7 T4
Unclassified SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAGE (When Deco Entorec) REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE READ INSTRUCTIONS

REPORT__ DOCUMENTATIONPAGE_ BEFORE COMPLETING FORM

1. REPORT NUMBER 2. GOVT ACCESSION NO. 3. RECIPIENT'S CATALOG NUMBER

Technical Report 439 i 1.l0 -_ A _, ' W y ,

4. TITLE (end Subtitle) S. TYPE OF REPORT & PERIOD COVERED

/ W/! EAEYWORDgw. .LETHOD OFLP-VCABULARY 4ACQUISITION: -

AN EXPERIME EVALUATION, S. PERFORMING ORG. REPORT NUMBER

7. AUTHOR(*) 8. CONTRACT OR GRANT NUMBER(.)

" Douglas/Griffith / --

9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS 10. PROGRAM ELEMENT. PROJECT, TASK

U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral -- AREA & WORK UNIT NUMBERS

and Social Sciences (PERI-OH) 2T1611

5001 Eisenhower Avenue, Alexandria, VA 22333 IA91B

11. CONTROLLING OFFICE NAME AND ADDRESS 12. REPORT DATE

Deputy Chief of Staff for Personnel January 1980

Washington, D.C. 20310 13. NUMBER OF PAGES

29 14. MONITORING AGENCY NAME & ADDRESS(If different from Controlling Office) IS. SECURITY CLASS. (of this report)

-- ,Unclassified ~ IS.. DECL ASSI FIC ATION/DOWNGRADING

SCHEDULE

16. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT (of this Report)

Approved for public release; distribution unlimited.

17. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT (of the abetrct entered In Block 20, If different from Report)

I. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES

IS. KEY WORDS (Continue on reverse aide if neeessary and identify by block number)

Mnemonics Foreign language learning

Mnemotechnics Training

Memory

Learning

20AM T (Cemse a, ,rerve sM N n and idel iy by block numb,)

An experiment assessed the effectiveness of a mnemotechnic (memory

technique), the keyword technique, for learning foreign language vocabulary.

Participants were 60 Army enlisted personnel, 20 from each of the following

ranges of general technical (GT) aptitude: 90 and below, 91-109, and 110 and

above. All personnel learned the English translations of 15 Korean vocabulary

terms at a self-paced rate. Half the personnel in each group were instructed

in the keyword technique and were supplied keywords for each vocabulary item,

(Continued)

DD W3a Eot-now OFI mov as s 9OLET E Unclassified / / / j i SECUO??Y CLASSIFICATION Or rNts IAGE (bt Dats, Entered)

& i ' ,' - .

• ..
Unclassified

SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAGE(Wma, Dat. Bnte.d)

Item 20 (Continued)

'I

whereas the remaining personnel served as a control group. According to the

most representative criterion, the keyword group performed 79% better than

the control group. Although of primary interest to other researchers, this

report should also be of direct interest to the Defense Language Institute

and the training community.

ii Unclassified

SECURITY CLASSIFICATION Of THIS PAGE(When Dale Entftd)
Technical Report 439

THE KEYWORD METHOD OF VOCABULARY

ACQUISITION: AN EXPERIMENTAL EVALUATION

Douglas Griffith

Submitted by:

George W. Gividen, Chief

ARI FIELD UNIT AT FORT HOOD, TEXAS

Approved by:

Edgar M. Johnson, Acting Director

ORGANIZATIONS AND SYSTEMS

RESEARCH LABORATORY

U.S. ARMY RESEARCH INSTITUTE FOR THE BEHAVIORAL AND SOCIAL SCIENCES

5001 Eisenhower Avenue, Alexandria, Virginia 22333

Office. Deputy Chief of Staff for Personnel

Department of the Army

January 1980

Army Project Number Independent Research

2T161101A91B on Memory Enhancement

Approed for pulic releus; dIstribution unlimilted.

ift
1I

ARI Research Reports and Technical Reports are intended for sponsors of

R&D tasks and for other research and military agencies. Any findings ready

for implementation at the time of publication are presented in the last part

of the Brief. Upon completion of a major phase of the task, formal recommendations for official action normally are conveyed to appropriate military

agencies by briefing or Disposition Form.

iv
FOREWORD

This report is concerned with the evaluation of a mnemotechnic

(memory technique) for enhancing the rate of vocabulary acquisition. A

review of the literature on this mnemotechnic, the keyword method, is

provided as well as an experiment evaluating the effectiveness of the

keyword method for military personnel. Research for this report was

done as In-house Laboratory Independent Research under Army Project

2T161101A91B. Although this report should be of most direct interest

to the Defense Language Institute, the principles and data included

in the report should be valuable to any agency interested in increasing

the rate of information acquisition for military personnel.

'bkEPH ZE 1E

lka-hnical Director

tACCESSION 00of NTIS White Section

DOC Butt Section 0

UNANNOUNCED 03

JUSTIFICATION -- ,

by

Dist. AVAL. and , or

IV
THE KEYWORD METHOD OF VOCABULARY ACQUISITION: AN EXPERIMENTAL

EVALUATION

BRIEF

Requirement:

The keyword method of vocabulary acquisition is a two-step mnemotechnic for learning vocabulary terms. The first step, the acoustic

link, generates a keyword based on the sound of the foreign word. The

second step, the imagery link, ties the keyword to the meaning of the

item to be learned, via an interactive visual image or other association. Say, for example, that the keyword method is used to learn the

Korean term, p'o su, meaning gunner. The first step is to generate a

keyword, for example "poor Sue." The second step is to link this keyword to the memory by an image, say a mental picture of poor Sue, the

gunner. Although this technique may seem involved, other research has

indicated it is effective.

The first objective of this experiment was to assess the utility

of this technique with military personnel, using a language that has

not been previously investigated regarding the keyword technique. The

second objective was to assess the general utility of mnemotechnics

(memory techniques) for military personnel. Previous research has

indicated that mnemotechnics might only be effective when used by personnel with General Technical (GT) scores 110 or over.

Procedure:

A factorial experimental design was employed which crossed two

levels of instructional set (a keyword group vs. a control group),

three levels of General Technical Aptitude (90 and below, 91 through

109, and 110 and above), and two different 15-word Korean lists.

Sixty enlisted personnel participated, with five in each of the

12 groups. Participants paced themselves during both study and test

phases. Participants, run individually, continued until either they

successfully gave the 15 correct English translations of the Korean

terms or until the 40-minute session ended. At the end of the session

participants evaluated the technique. WTt

vii

AL V. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Findings:

In addition to the subjective evaluation, four objective criteria

were used: the number correct on the final trial, the total study time,

the Study Efficiency Ratio (SER = number correct on final trial divided

by total study time), and the total test time. In terms of the number

correct, the total study time, and the SER, one list version was more

difficult than the other, performance was a positive function of GT aptitude, and participants using the keyword technique performed better

than control subjects. With respect to the most representative criteria, the SER, participants using the keyword method performed 79-,

better than the control participants. The subjective evaluation mainly

corroborated the objective findings. Analysis of the total test time

indicated that the high GT group required less testing time.

These findings argue specifically for the utility of the keyword

method, and, more generally, for the utility of mnemotechnics for

military personnel regardless of mental aptitude.

Utilization of Findings:

These findings should be of direct interest to the Defense Language

Institute. As a training method, the keyword technique has potential

application to the four following groups: (1) linguists; (2) personnel

who are already in or are about to be transferred to non-English speaking host countries; (3) personnel learning English as a second language;

and (4) personnel in the Basic Skills Education Program (BSEP). More

generally, these findings point to the potential of incorporating

mnemonics and mnemotechnics into military training.

viii

. - .

4-,'. _______________ -
THE KEYWORD METHOD OF VOCABULARY ACQUISITION: AN EXPERIMENTAL

EVALUATION

CONTENTS PAGE

INTRODUCTION I

OBJECTIVES 4

METHOD

Design and Subjects 5

Procedure 5

Lists 6

RESULTS

Number Correct on Final Trial 7

Total Study Time 8

Study Efficiency Ratio (SER) 8

Total Test Time 10

DISCUSSION 11

CONCLUSIONS 12

REFERENCE NOTE 15

REFERENCES 15

APPENDIX A - Keyword Instructions 17

B - Control Instructions 21

C - Experimental Lists 23

D - A Summary of Study and Test Times

and Recommendations for Group

Presentations . 25

E - A Summary of Interviews and Subjective

Ratings on the Keyword Method of

Vocabulary Acquisition 27

LIST OF TABLES

TABLE 1 Mean Number Correct on the Final Trial as

a Function of Instructional Set and General

Technical (GT) Aptitude 7

ix

" -- - p,-m . ---- A ".. . --.- 
I !

TABLE 2 Mean Total Study Time (in seconds) as a

Function of Instructional Set and General

Technical (GT) Aptitude

TABLE 3 Mean Study Efficiency Ratios (SER number

correct final trial I total study

time) as a Function of Instructional Set

and General Technical (GT) Aptitude 9

TABLE 4 Mean Total Test Time as a Function of

Instructional Set and General Technical

(GT) Aptitude 10

x

_ _ _ .,*.
TffI KEYWORD MLII 101) 01 \0C.\B)1ARY .. Qt 1 1O1 :

AN F-XPFR IMNT.\I. IV\LtJAI ION

INTRODUCTION

The keyword method of vocabulary acquisition is a mnemotechnic

(memory technique) designed to increase the speed of acquisition of

new vocabulary terms. The keyword technique consists of two steps.

1he first step involves the creation of keyword based on the sound

of the to-be-acquired item to serve as an acoustic link. Take, for

example, the Korean term for airplane hangar, Kyok nap ko. Here

the keyword could be "nap." The second step involves associating

the keyword, "nap" to the meaning of Kyok nap ko, "airplane

hangar," by means of mediating visual image, the imagery link. For

instance, the keyword "nap" might be linked to the meaning,

airplane hangar, by, forming a visual image mentally of someone

taking a nap in an airplane hangar. Later, when the term Kyok nap

ko is encountered, the sound "nap" will likely trigger the mental

image of someone taking a nap in an airplane hangar, which will

allow the retrieval of the appropriate meaning.

That the above mental gymnastics could enhance vocabulary

acquisition might seem improbable until it is realized that there

are several respectable studies in the experimental literature

indicating that the technique works. Ott, Butler, Blake, and Ball

(1973) assessed the utility of the keyword technique for the

acquisition of the English interpretations of twenty-four

one-syllable German nouns and adjectives. Ott et al. employed four

experimental conditions. In on condition subjects were shown

slides of pictures of the keywords along with the English

translation as the German words were presented aurally. In a

second condition subjects saw slides of the English translations of

the aurally presented German words and were instructed to form

their own keywords and to link the keyword to the English

translation via an interactive image. The remaining two conditions

were control conditions. One condition was a rote rehearsal

control group which was instructed to learn the English

translations by repeating the German and English pairs over and

over. The other control group was simply instructed to learn the

English translations of the German words. The list was presented

once at a twelve seconds per item rate. Recall was assessed

immediately after the entire list had been presented, then again

eight minutes after completion of initial testing, then again two

weeks later. The two control conditions were significantly

inferior to the two experimental conditions on all three tests.

Subjects who were required to generate their own keywords and

mediating images did not do as well as subjects who were provided

the mediating image based on the keyword. The two experimental

groups scored about equally well on the delayed retention test,

however. The experimental groups performed about twice as well as

the control groups on all recall tests.

The Ott et al. (1973) study might be regarded as somewhat

- - - - -- - - - - -- -- ---- -- . .. - -
limited since only one-syllable German words were employed. A

series of experiments by Raugh and Atkinson (1974, 1975) employed

Spanish words and included words of more than one syllable. In

their first experiment all subjects were first taught keywords for

a 60-word Spanish vocabulary. Then the subjects were divided into

experimental and control groups. The experimental group was

instructed to use mental imagery to associate each keyword to the

appropriate English translation. The control group was instructed

to learn the English translation by rote rehearsal. The first test

scores were 88% correct for the experimental group versus 28%

correct for the control group. Their second experiment was similar

to their first except that the test vocabulary keywords were not

prelearned. Here the results were 59% correct for the experimental

group and 30% correct for the control group. The third experiment

compared the keyword condition against a control condition that was

allowed to use any learning strategy except the keyword strategy.

A within-subjects design was employed here. Although many subjects

reported using the keyword technique for some of the control items,

the keyword group still outperformed the control group by 54%

correct to 45% correct. A fourth experiment was similiar to the

third experiment except that a free choice condition was added in

which a subject could request a keyword if desired. Here the final

test scores were 59%, 57% and 50% for the free-choice, keyword, and

control condition, respectively. Although the free choice and

keyword conditions did not differ significantly from each other,

they were both significantly superior to the free choice control

condition. Under the free choice condition, subjects were more

likely to request a keyword for the more difficult items.

Atkinson and Raugh (1975) extended their research on the

keyword method to a non-Romance language, Russian. They employed a

between-subjects design and a 120-word Russian test vocabulary.

Forty-word vocabularies were presented on each of three sessions.

On the comprehensive test, the keyword aroup averaged 72% correct

versus 46% correct for the control grou7 that was instructed simply

to learn the English translations however they wished.

The foregoing studies were formal experiments in which the

subjects were not enrolled in a foreign language course for the

particular foreign language under study. Raugh, Schupbach, and

Atkinson (1977) did a study in which the subjects were second year

students of Russian. Thirteen students studied a large basic

vocabulary over an eight to ten week period. Vocabulary words were

presented via a computer and subjects were given the option of

being supplied a keyword for a vocabulary item if they so

requested. Across the entire period of the study, the probablility

of requesting a keyword the first time a particular vocabulary word

was presented was greater than .70. Subsequently, keywords were

more likely to be requested if the item had been missed on previous

test trials. Most students reported that the keyword technique was

2
highly effective.

Not all studies on the keyword technique have revealed

positive effects. Willerman (1977) examined the utility of the

keyword technique for first year college French students.

Moreover, she examined French vocabulary production in addition to

English translation as dependent variables. Willerman found no

facilitating effect for the keyword technique under any conditions.

In fact, some students were quite negative to the keyword

technique. A close examination of her instructions and procedures

suggest that the instructions and procedures are likely reasons why

she did not obtain significant effects. Her instructions were minimal and very little was provided in the way of training and

feedback to assure that the students understood the technique.

Before proceeding further, two points should be realized about

the keyword technique. First, most proponents of the keyword

technique would probably agree that the technique should not be

applied for every vocabulary word. The technique is probably best

applied when more common techniques fail. Before employing the

technique, the student would do well first to try to recognize any

common roots or cognates the to-be-learned item might have with

vocabulary that is already known. If no common roots or cognates

are found, then a keyword can be used to learn the term. Indeed,

this strategy was the model one for the subjects in the Raugh et

al. (1977) study. Second, it should also be realized that the

keyword technique is not applicable only for the acquisition of a

recognition vocabulary for a foreign language. The technique is

more generally applicable for the learning of new vocabulary, be

that vocabulary foreign, native, or technical.

In the present study, four subpopulations within the Army were identified that might potentially benefit from the keyword method

of vocabulary acquisition. The most obvious subpopulation, of

course, consists of Army linguists. A second subpopulation

consists of those soldiers about to be sent to a foreign,

non-English-speaking country. A third subpopulation consists of

soldiers for whom English is not their native language and whose

English abilities are deficient. A fourth subpopulation consists

of those individuals with vocabulary deficiencies stemming from a

lack of basic educational skills. Such individuals could be placed

in a Basic Skills Education Program (BSEP) that incorporates the

keyword technique.

For a first experiment employing a military sample it was

decided that a more general assessment of the utility of the

keyword technique could be accomplished if a broad sampling of the

enlisted population were done. A good basis for assuring a broad

sampling is to employ general technical (GT) aptitude scores as

sampling criteria. The GT aptitude test is a measure of general

3
academic aptitude and has an empirical mean of 100 and a standard

deviation of 20. Individuals with GT scores below 90 are usually

eligible for participation in the Basic Skills Education Program

(BSEP). Such individuals can be regarded as low aptitude.

Individuals with GT scores of 110 or higher have been regarded as

eligible for further testing for officer candidate schools. Such

individuals can be regarded as having high aptitude. Individuals

with GT scores between these values can be regarded as having

moderate aptitude. These three ranges of GT aptitude were employed

in the current experiment.

This research on the keyword mnemotechnic is related to the

more general issue regarding the feasibility of mnemotechnical

training for military personnel. An experiment by Griffith and

Actkinson (1978) indicated that whereas individuals in the GT 110

and above group were able to use a rhyme pegword mnemotechnic to

advantage, the moderate and low GT groups demonstrated no

significant facilitation. Griffith and Actkinson used a paced

procedure during both the study and the test phases of the trials.

They speculated that perhaps this paced procedure was responsible

for the failure of the mnemotechnic to enhance the performance of

the low and moderate GT groups.

The current study, then, employed an unpaced study test

procedure and used personnel from the following three ranges of GT

aptitude: 90 and below, 91 through 109, and 110 and above. Half

the individuals in each of these groups were given instructions and

practice in using the keyword technique and were given a keyword to

each vocabulary item. The remaining subjects served as a control

group and were allowed to learn the vocabulary items however they

normally would. Korean was chosen as the target language as no

previous studies on the keyword technique had employed Korean and

as Korean is a language spoken in an area where U.S. Army troops

are deployed.

OBJECTIVES

1. To assess the utility of the keyword method of vocabulary

acquisition for military personnel.

2. To assess the potential of mnemotechnical training for personnel

of high, moderate, and low General Technical aptitudes.

4
METHOD

Design and Subjects

A 2 (Instructional Set) by 3 (GT Level) by 2 (List Version)

factorial design was employed. All factors were manipulated

between subjects. The two levels of instructional set were the

keyword group versus the control group. The three GT levels

encompassed the following ranges: 90 and below, 91 through 109, and

110 and above. Two different lists of fifteen Korean military

terms each were employed to enhance the generality of the findings.

A total of 60 subjects, 20 from each of the GT levels, was employed

in the data analysis. Subjects were randomly assigned to

instructional sets and list versions with restriction that all the

cells in the design be filled at the same rate.

Procedure

Subjects were run individually. At the outset of the session

the subject was informed that the Army Research Institute was

conducting a study to determine how rapidly soldiers can learn

foreign vocabulary words, and that the current study involved

Korean words. The instructions for the keyword and the control

subjects are presented in Appendixes A and B, respectively. Both

groups heard ten Korean words to familiarize them with the sound of

the language. For the keyword subjects these same ten words were

used to give instruction in the keyword technique. They were given

examples of how a keyword could be employed to form an image by

linking the keyword to iti appropriate translation. For the

remaining six words, keyword subjects were supplied a keyword and were asked to describe the image they formed linking the keyword to

its appropriate translation. Feedback was provided on their

efforts.

At the conclusion of this instructional phase the experiment

proper was begun. During the study phase subjects were shown the

English translations of Korean words on 3" x 5" cards as the Korean

was repeated at approximate intervals of five seconds by the

experimenter. The procedure was self-paced, subjects indicating

when they were ready to go on to the next item. This procedure was

identical for keyword and control subjects except that for the

keyword subjects keywords were presented in parentheses alongside

the English translation on the 3" x 5" card. After all fifteen

items had been presented the test phase was begun. During the test

phase a Korean word was pronounced at approximate intervals of five

seconds. A given item was repeated until the subject either

responded with the correct English translation or requested the

next item. This procedure continued until all fifteen items had

been tested. If all items were responded to correctly, then the

session was over. If not, the procedure was repeated until either

5
all fifteen items were responded to correctly or until 40 minutes

from the beginning of the first trial had elapsed. Subjects were

not stopped if time elapsed during a trial. Rather, if it was

estimated that there was insufficient time for another trial, the

session was ended. The cards were reshuffled before each study trial. Three different test orders were used during the test

phase. At the end of the session keyword subjects were asked to

rate the keyword technique on a scale from zero (completely useless) to four (of maximum use). All subjects were debriefed.

Lists

Two different 15 item lists of Korean military terms were

employed. These lists are presented in Appendix C.

6

!,I
RESULTS

The four following dependent variables were employed in the

data analyses: the number correct on the final trial; total study

time (i.e., the study time per trial summed across an individual's

trials); a derived measure, the Study Efficiency Ratio (SER), which

is the number correct on the final trial divided by the total study

time; and the total test time (i.e., the recall test time per trial

summed across an individual's trials). Separate univariate

analyses were computed on each dependent variable.

Number Correct on Final Trial

A summary of the number correct collapsed over list version is

presented in Table 1. A 2 (Instructional Set) by 3 (GT) by 2 (List

Version) ANOVA yielded straightforward results. Whereas all three

main effects are statistically significant, no interactions are

(all interaction F's (1.17). The instructional set effect, F

(1,48) = 14.82, <.01, reflects the superior recall of the keyword

group. An analysis of the GT effect, F (2,48) = 11.33, p<.01,

reveals that recall is a positive function of GT aptitide.

Newman-Keuls tests substantiate that all three means differ

significantly (p<.05) from each other. Although the different list

versions were not intended to represent different levels of

difficulty, the significant effect of list, F (1,48) = 5.77, p<.05,

indicates that list A (i = 10.63) is easier than List B (i = 8.2).

The MS error for all the above tests is 15.392.

TABLE 1

Mean Number Correct on the Final Trial as a Function

of Instructional Set and General-Technical (GT) Aptitude

Instructional Set

GT Range Keyword Control

> 110 13.5 11.4 12.4

91-109 12.1 6.4 9.2

< 90 8.5 4.6 6.6

11.4 7.5

7

a. ,
Total Study Time

The results for total study time, collapsed across list

version, are presented in Table 2. The same 2 (Instructional Set)

by 3 (GT) by 2 (list Version) ANOVA as was run on the number

correct was run on the total study time, and this ANOVA reveals a

similar pattern of results. The effect of instructional set, F

(1,48) = 8.26, p<.01, is attributable to the keyword group

requiring less total study time than the control group. The GT

effect, F (2,48) = 4.79, p<.05, indicates that the low and moderate

GT groups require less total study time than does the low GT group.

The effect of list version, F (1,48) = 17.94, p<.01, again reflects

that List B (I = 968 secs.)-is more difficult than List A (i = 752

secs.) All interaction F's are less than 1.00. The MS error for

all the above tests is 38,861.

TABLE 2

Mean Total Study Time (in seconds) as a Function

of Instructional Set and General-Technical (GT) Aptitude

Instructional Set

GT Range Keyword Control

> 110 738 868 803

91-109 730 881 805

< 90 893 1050 971

x 787 933

Study Efficiency Ratio (SER)

The SER is employed to combine in one measure the dependent

variables number correct on the final trial and the total study

time required to achieve that number correct. The SER is defined

as the number correct on the final trial divided by the total study

time. These values have been multiplied by 1,000 for ease of

presentation. Accordingly, the larger the ratio, the more

efficient the study indicated. Given that the analyses of the

number correct and the total study time reveal a similar pattern of

8

, ' .. " .74
results, the analysis of the SER should reveal nothing new. Of all the dependent measures, however, the SER is viewed as the single best criterion for this study.

A summary of the SER's, collapsed over list version, is presented in Table 3. A 2 (Instructional Set) by 3 (GT) by 2 (List Version) ANOVA reveals a pattern of results similar to that

obtained with the other dependent variables. The instructional set effect, F (1,48) = 16.49, p<.01, again indicates the vastly superior performance of the keyword group. The GT effect, F (2,48) = 10.94, p<.01, reflects that study efficiency is a positive function of GT aptitude. Newman-Keuls tests indicate that all three means differ significantly (p = .05) from each other. The list effect F (1,48) = 11.67, p<.01, again is attributable to List B (x = 9.5) being more difficult than List A ( = 15.5). All interaction F's are less than 1.00. The MS error for all tests is

46.283.

TABLE 3

Mean Study Efficiency Ratios (SER = # correct final

trial I total study time) as a Function

of Instructional Set and General-Technical (GT) Aptitude

Instructional Set

GT Range Keyword Control

110 20.8 14.6 17.'

91-109 17.1 7.4 12.2

< 90 10.3 4.9 7.6

x 16.1 9.0

Note: The above values have been multiplied by one thousand for

ease of presentation.

9

4
Total Test Time

A summary of the total recall test time, collapsed over list

version, is presented in Table 4. A 2 (Instructional Set) by 3

(GT) by 2 (List Version) ANOVA indicates statistical significance

for only GT, F (2,48) = 8.34, p<.01. This effect is apparently

attributable to the high GT group requiring less test time than the

moderate or low GT groups. The F ratios for the instructional set

and list effects are less than 1.00. Of the interactions, only the

instructional set by GT interaction F is greater than 2.00, F

(2,48) = 2.36, P>.0 5 , and the three way interaction is greater than

1.00, F (2,48) = 1.21, p>. 05 . The F's for the other two

interactions are less than 1.00. The MS error for all tests is

40,024.

TABLE 4

Mean Total Test time as a Function of Instructional

Set and General-Technical(GT) Aptitude

Instructional Set

GT Range Keyword Control

> 110 681 854 767

91-109 1027 960 994

< 90 909 958 989

909 924

10

diT
DISCUSSION

The results of this experiment are remarkably straightforward.

The keyword technique is highly effective. Regardless of the

intellectual aptitude of the subjects or the difficulty of the

material, the keyword technique works. In fact, when the measure

most indicative of performance, the SER, is employed, the keyword

group's performance is 79% better than that of the control group.

The potential, then, of the keyword method of vocabulary

acquisition is quite high. The current experiment on the keyword

method was the first done involving military personnel. Moreover,

this study on the keyword method is the first involving the Korean

language. There is little correspondence between the Korean and

English language even regarding their phonetic systems. A priori

such lack of phonetic correspondence might lead to the conclusion

that keyword development and keyword recognition would be

problematic. Any such difficulties certainly did not obscure the

overwhelming effectiveness of the keyword technique. Moreover, the

vocabulary terms were restricted to words used in a military

context. Thus, it might be expected that item similarity would

result in semantic confusions among mediators. Again, any such

difficulties did not obscure the overwhelming effectiveness of the

keyword technique.

At the beginning of this paper, four subpopulations of

military personnel were identified that might benefit from the

keyword technique. They were (1) Army linguists; (2) soldiers

deployed or about to be deployed to a non-English speaking host

country; (3) U. S. soldiers having trouble learning English as a

second language; and (4) soldiers enrolled in the Basic Skills

Education Program (BSEP). Although further research needs to be

done with each of these subpopulations, the indications from the

current study are all positive. In fact, it might be concluded

that the keyword technique would be of least use to Army linguists

as a result of their extensive linguistic training. Interviews

(see Appendix E) of linguists, however, indicated that they are

favorably disposed towards the technique.

With respect to vocabulary acquisition, additional questions

also need to be addressed. So far the technique has demonstrated

success only with passive (recognition) vocabulary. Although

Willerman's (1977) study failed to show positive effects for active

vocabulary, she also failed to show positive effects for passive

vocabulary. This question needs to be addressed further. Another

issue regards the effectiveness of the technique in a classroom

situation. One study (Fuentes, 1976) found that the technique's

effectiveness was lost in a classroom setting. Although a recent

series of experiments (Levin, Pressley, McCormick, Miller, and

Shriberg, 1979) have identified possible reasons for this loss of

II

- 1wq: ... .-- -- -- , -- --- -______--_
effectiveness in a classroom setting, this issue also needs to be

addressed further. Finally, the question of whether it is more

cost effective to supply keywords to students or to train them to

derive their own keyword needs to be addressed.

The second objective of this report was broader than the

first, and that was to assess the general utility of mnemotechnical

training. It will be remembered that Griffith and Actkinson (1973)

found that mnemonic instructions facilitated performance only for

those individuals comparable in academic aptitude to the college

population, those with GT scores of 110 or higher. Griffith and

Actkinson employed a paced procedure, however. They argued that

perhaps moderate and low GT aptitude individuals coild effectively

use a mnemotechnic, but the time constraints in the Griffith and

Actkinson study precluded them from doing so. The current

experiment supports this argument. Given sufficient time, moderate

and low aptitude individuals are able to use a mnemotechnic to

advantage. Appendix D presents summaries of study and test times,

and provides recommendations for classroom use. Another argument

that has been advanced regarding the use of the keyword technique

and a paced procedure with high aptitude individuals is that the

paced procedure differentially inhibits control performance as

contrasted with keyword performance (J.W. Hall, Note 1). According

to this argument both the keyword and the control groups engage in

mnemonic elaboration. Control subjects, however, have to decide

which strategy to use and how to develop mediators, etc., whereas

keyword subjects have their strategy clearly delineated for them.

Consequently, under a paced procedure control subjects are

inhibited rather than keyword subjects facilitated. The current

experiment contraindicates this argument. Even under the unpaced

condition, the high GT keyword group still outperformed the high GT

control group. This finding applies even though some control

subjects reported using some rather sophisticated strategies during

their experimental debriefings.

Clearly then, the appropriate use of mnemotechnics promises an

enhancement of training regardless of the aptitude level of

personnel. The acquisition of Korean vocabulary is a difficult

task, yet the current experiment indicates an enhancement of memory

performance across all levels of mental aptitude. Still, much

research must be done and mnemonics and mnemotechnics must be

incorporated into training carefully. A technical report by

Griffith (1979) provides a review of the training potential of

mnemonics and mnemotechnics as well as a suggested program of

research and implementation.

CONCLUSIONS

The following conclusions are offered:

12

l 'I . t *. ' . ...- yr. ..- --.----- - -
(1) The keyword method is an effective technique for teaching

military personnel foreign vocabulary.

(2) Mnemonics and mnemotechnics, when appropriately applied,

promise significant training enhancement regardless of the mental

aptitude of the personnel being trained.

13

- k - -. 
Reference Note

1. Hall, J. W. Keyword method effects on university students learning

of foreign language vocabulary. Paper presented at the annual

meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San

Francisco, April 1979.

References

Atkinson, R. C., and Raugh, M. R. An application of the mnemonic

keyword method to the acquisition of a Russian vocabulary.

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory,

1975, 104, 126-133.

Fuentes, E. J. An investigation into the use of imagery and

generativity in learning a foreign language vocabulary. (Doctoral

Dissertation, Stanford University, 1976). Dissertation Abstracts

International, 1976, 37, 2694A. (University Microfilms No.

76-25, 997)

Griffith, D. A review of the literature on memory enhancement: the

potential and relevance of mnemotechnics for military training

(ARI Technical Paper 436). Alexandria, VA. U.S. Army Research

Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences, December 1979.

Griffith, D., and Actkinson, T. R. Mnemonic enhancement and general

technical ability. (ARI Technical Paper 336) Alexandria, VA.

U. S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social

Sciences, September 1978 (NTIS No. AD-A061314)

Levin, J. R., Pressley, M., McCormick, C. B., Miller, G. E., and

Shriberg, L. K. Assessing ther classroom potential of the

keyword method. Journal of Educational Psychology, 1979, 71,

583-594.

Ott, C. E., Butler, D. C., Blake, R. S., and Ball, J. P. The effect

of interactive-image elaboration on the acquisition of foreign

language vocabulary. Language Learning, 1973, 23, 197-206.

Raugh, M. R., and Atkinson, R. C. A mnemonic method for the

acquisition of a second-language vocabulary. Technical Report

No. 224, Institute for Mathematical Studies in the Social

Sciences, Stanford University, March 1974 (NTIS No. AD-777099).

Raugh, M. R., and Atkinson, R. C. A mnemonic method for learning

a second language vocabulary. Journal of Educational

Psychology, 1975, 67, 1-16.

Raugh, M. R., Schupbach, R. D., and Atkinson, R. C. Teaching

a large Russian language vocabulary by the mnemonic

15

p B- Z40 11LI4

A'
keyword method. Instructional Science 1977, 6,

Willerman, 

recall of 

B. 

French 

S. The 

vocabulary. 

effect of a keyword mnnemonic on the Unpublished University doctoral dissertation, of Texas at Austin, 7977.

16
I|

Appendix A

KEYWORD INSTRUCTIONS

Hello, my name is and I am from the Army Research

Institute. According to my information, you are

We're doing a study to determine how rapidly soldiers can learn foreign

vocabulary words. This study concerns Korean. Do you know any Korean?

We're going to learn a list of twenty vocabulary words. As soon as

you've learned these words you can go.

Before we go on with the list, I want to teach you a technique that has

been used to facilitate the learning of the English translations of

foreign words. This technique is called the Keyword technique, and

here's how it works. The first step of this technique is to invent a

Keyword based on the sound of the foreign word. For example, the Korean

term for gunner is p'o-su. A good Keyword for p'o-su is "poor Sue." The

second step involves forming a link between the Keyword and the English

translation by forming an image, that is, a mental picture, relating the

Keyword to its English translation. For example, you could form a

mental picture of a female soldier by the name of Sue manning a gun.

You might even elaborate this picture by imagining rain and seeing poor

Sue the gunner in the rain. The next time you hear the Korean word

p'o-su, the sound should remind you of "poor Sue," which in turn should

remind you of the mental picture of poor Sue the gunner in the rain.

This mental picture, then, reminds you of the meaning, "gunner." Do you

have any questions? Do you see how the technique is supposed to work?

17
Sometimes the Keyword will be based on only part of the sound of the

foreign word. For example, the Keyword for Kyok nap ko, meaning

airplane hangar, might be "nap." You might then form a mental picture

of yourself taking a nap in a hangar. Again, the idea is that the sound

nap will trigger the mental picture of you taking a nap in a hangar.

You should then remember the meaning, "hangar."

Sometimes, the translation will be abstract, that is, not easy to

picture. You will see, however, that with a little imagination you can

make an abstract idea into a picture. Take the Korean word chon-buk,

meaning subsersion. Say the Keyword for chon-buk is "book." You could

imagine a picture of a book on subversion.

The images you form don't have to make sense. NO MATTER HOW ILLOGICAL

OR NONSENSICAL A MENTAL PICTURE MIGHT FE, MENTAL PICTURES ARE POWERFUL

MEMORY AIDS. For example, say that the Keyword for the Korean word chi

rae, meaning a land mine, was "gee ray." You could form a mental

picture of a land mine giving off "G-rays." If you formed this mental

picture vividly, it is very likely that the next time you heard chi rae,

you would think of this mine giving off G-rays. In turn, this image

would remind you of the Korean word's meaning.

Do you have any questions? In this study the Keywords will be supplied

to you. You, however, are responsible for forming your own images

linking the Keywords to the translations. I am now going to pronounce

some Korean words and to show you their Keyword and translations on 3x5

18

I

.i '

L .- *
cards. I am going to ask you to describe for me the images you form

linking the Keywords to the translations.

Korean Keyword Translation

dae po (diaper) cannon

t'an yak (tan yak) ammunition

hon-byong (hen) military policy

kong-byong (Kong) engineer

tul kyok (tall cook) charge

pun kyon dae (bun candy) detachment

Any questions? We want you to use this technique in the vocabulary

words to come.

Here's how we're going to proceed. I'm going to show you the Keyword in

parentheses along with the English translation of a Korean word. As I

am showing you the translation, I will repeat the Korean word three

times. During this time you should listen carefully to my pronunciation

and try to form an image linking the Keyword to its English translation.

Later I am going to pronounce the Korean word and ask you to remember

its English translation. If you have formed a good image linking the

Keyword to the translation, the Korean word should remind you of the

Keyword which, in turn, should remind you of the correct translation.

Take as much time as you want. I'll repeat the Korean pronunciation

over and over. When you are ready, say "next," and we'll go on to the

next card. We'll repeat this procedure until we've gone through the

19

d{ ,_ _ __ _ _
entire list of fifteen cards. Then you'll be tested. I will prounounce

the Korean words over and over and ask you to give me the English

translations. During testing you will not see the Keywords; the Korean

words should remind you of the respective Keywords.

We'll repeat this procedure until you get all fifteen correct. Are

there any questions?

20
Appendix P

CONTROL INSTRUCTIONS

Hello, my name is _ and I am from the Army Research

Institute. According to my information, you are

We're doing a study to determine how rapidly soldiers can learn foreign

vocabulary words. This study concerns Korean. Do you know any Korean?

We're going to learn a list of fifteen vocabulary words. As soon as

you've learned these words you can go.

Here are some Korean words similar to the ones we'll be learning:

pl'o-su - gunner t'an yak - ammunition

kyok-nap-ko - airplane hangar hon-byong - military police

chon-buk - subversion kong-byong - engineer

chi rae - land mine tul kyok - charge

dae p'o - cannon pun kyon dae - detachment

Here's how we're going to proceed. I'm going to show you the English

translation of a Korean word on a 3x5 card. As I am showing you the

translation I will repeat the Korean word three times. During this time

you should listen carefully to my pronunciation and study its English

translation. Later I am going to pronounce the Korean and ask you to

remember its English translation. Study the word as long as you like.

I'll repeat the Korean pronunciation over and over. When you are ready,

say "next," and we'll go on the next word. We'll repeat this procedure

until we've gone through the entire list of fifteen cards.

21

I
Then you'll be tested. I will pronounce the Korean word over and over

and ask you to give me the English translations.

We'll repeat this procedure until you get all fifteen words correct.

Are there any questions?

22
Appendix C

Experimental Lists

Version A

English

Korean Transliteration Keyword Translation

chung dae (June Day) Company

chun cha (cha cha) tank

c bo - byong (bow) infantry

C ki - byong (key) cavalry

cho - kyok - byong (jaw cook) sniper

po - byong (pour) artillery

o di (udder) where

sa - dan (sedan) division

! p'ok t'an (buck ten) bomb

r" bun dae (bun day) squad

1 * buk kyok p'o (pack yak) mortar

so ch'ong (sew) rifle C

kong kyok (kong cook) attack

C tong - yok quan (tongue) interpreter

=t dae dae (tea day) battalion

23

I;
Version B

English

Korean Transliteration Keyword Translation

- pan kyok (pan) counter attack

Jr kun dan (gun den) Army corps

L yon dae (young day) regiment

X H chock chon (jock) operation

- 1 chull kyok (chew cook) pursuit

i kunin (gun) soldier

o7 mu chang (change) armament -.

si ga chan (cigar) street fighting

su se (Sue see) defensive

- kyong gay kyong bow (gay bow) alert

bo - ch'o (Poor Joe) general

4- U F!71 chun p'a tam ji ki (chin Pa) radar

1 -71 chant'u ki (chant a key) fighter plane

r I hu tea (tea) withdrawal

d-fI"I kong gun ki ji (kong gun) air base

24

L s .II. -- --... _ _-- 
Appendix D

A Summary of Study and Test Times and Recommendations

for Group Presentations

Presented below is a summary of the study times and the test

times by trial and by keyword and control groups. In the absence of

anything better, this summary can be used to estimate suitable study

and testing times for group presentations. Before using this summary

in such a manner, however, a few points should be realized. First of

all, the times presented below are not necessarily the optimal

presentation times for this task. Rather, they represent how the

participants chose to pace themselves in this study. Secondly, these

times are very likely specific to the materials used (i.e., Korean

terms). Moreover, the task material is exceptionally difficult. It

is likely that with an easier subject matter these times would have

been lower. Still, in the absence of better data, the current data

can serve as a worst case estimate. The first step is to estimate the

average GT aptitide of the group (in the absence of this knowledge,

the low GT group can be used as a worst case estimate). For a given

trial, the standard deviation can be added to the mean time for a

given trial. By then dividing this time by fifteen, one obtains a

presentation time per item.

25

"S

. . .. i| ..
Keyword-Mean Test Times (n's and s.d.'s

presented in parentheses)

Trial #

GT Group 1 2 3

> 110 (10) 190 (58) (10) 141 (40) (9) 120 (37)

91-109 (10) 286 (108) (10) 227 (95) (10) 169 (50)

< 90 (10) 250 (94) (10) 230 (94) (10) 195 (71)

4 5 6

> 110 (8) 122 (30) (7) 99 (35) (3) 99 (43) 91-109 (9) 142 (42) (8) 145 (82) (7) 119 (40)

< 90 (9) 175 (62) (8) 137 (32) (5) 89 (21)

7 8 9

> 110 (2) 77 (6) (2) 80 (1) (2) 74 (6)

91-109 (2) 88 (29) - _ < 90 (3) 87 (19) (1) 74

Control-Mean Study Times (n's and s.d.'s

presented in parentheses)

Trial #

GT Group 1 2 3

> 110 (10) 141 (45) (10) 146 (60) (10) 142 (51)

91-109 (10) 202 (85) (10) 188 (65) (10) 166 (47)

< 90 (10) 214 (99) (10) 227 (120) (9) 166 (55)

4 5 6

> 110 (10) 136 (78) (9) 117 (34) (8) 105 (43) 91-109 (8) 148 (35) (8) 141 (37) (6) 123 (26)

<90 (8) 147 (62) (7) 154 (32) (6) 139 (42)

7 8 9

> 110 (7) 95 (35) (4) 66 (8) (1) 73 91-109 (5) 114 (43) (3) 82 (21) (2) 92 (7)

< 90 (3) 128 (51) (1) 101 (1) 101

26

iV
Keyword-Mean Test Times (n's and s.d.'s

presented in parentheses

Trial *

GT Group 1 2 3

> 110 (10) 207 (94) (10) 164 (58) (9) 139 (41)

91-109 (10) 219 (89) (10) 167 (76) (10) 124 (49)

< 90 (10) 245 (154) (10) 192 (79) (10) 166 (63)

4 5 6

> 110 (8) 130 (48) (7) 102 (29) (3) 94 (31)

91-109 (9) 87 (26) (8) 82 (48) (7) 88 (14)

< 90 (9) 144 (51) (8) 102 (45) (5) 93 (34)

7 8 9

> 110 (2) 66 (5) (2) 63 (2) (2) 64 (8)

91-109 (2) 70 (13) - -

< 90 (3) 87 (29) (1) 57

Control - Mean Test Times (n's and s.d.'s

presented in parentheses)

Trial f

GT Group 1 2 3

> 110 (10) 191 (48) (10) 154 (72) (10) 143 (61)

91-109 (10) 197 (94) (10) 189 (116) (10) 162 (75)

< 90 (10) 312 (222) (10) 284 (240) (9) 197 (162)

4 5 6

> 110 (10) 120 (43) (9) 112 (50) (8) 94 (38)

91-109 (8) 123 (24) (8) 109 (27) (6) 99 (35)

( 90 (8) 125 (31) (7) 106 (30) (6) 101 (23)

7 8 9

> 110 (7) 75 (17) (4) 61 (16) (1) 73

91-109 (5) 92 (32) (3) 86 (25) (2) 86 (25)

< 90 (3) 101 (32) (1) 64 (1) 59

27
Appendix E

A Summary of Interviews and Subjective Ratings on the

Keyword Method of Vocabulary Acquisition

Preliminary to the development of the experimental materials,

nine Army linguists (eight German, one Korean) were individually

interviewed, given a brief description of the keyword technique,

and asked for their opinions. Their responses were overwhelmingly

favorable. With the exception of one German linguist, all were

favorably disposed towards the tec'nique and expressed a

willingness to use the technique as instructors. The only concern

regarding the technique involved the time and effort required to

develop the keywords.

Later, incidental to the experiment proper, an Army linguist

was run through the experiment under the keyword condition. This

individual is a Russian linguist who also has studied Sanskritic

languages and lived in Pakistan. Although he initially had

reservations about the keyword technique, after using it he rated

the technique on a scale of zero to four. He believed that,

appropriately used, the technique was quite useful.

All subjects who were run under the keyword condition were

similarly asked to rate the keyword technique on a scale from zero

(completely useless) to four (at maximum use). The mean

effectiveness ratings are 3.4, 3.3, and 2.6, for the high, medium,

and low GT groups respectively. A Pearson r of .43 between the

number correct on the final trial and the effectiveness rating

suggests that an individual's recall performance might affect the

effectiveness rating.

29

- - - •
DISTRIBUTION

ARI Distribution Last

4 QASO (M&RA) 2 HOUSACDEC, Ft Ord. ATTN: Library

2 HODA iDAMI CSZ) I HOUSACOEC. Ft Ord ATTN ATEC-EX-E -Hum Factors

IHOA iDAPE PORI 2 USAEEC. Ft Benjamin Harison, ATT N Librarv,

IHODA iDAMA.AR) USAPACOC, Ft SenianmI Harrison ATTN ATCP-HR

I NOOA iDAPE HRE PO) 1 USA Comm-Eleict Sd.. Ft Monmouth. ATTN ATSN-EA

INOVA (SGRODI0 1 USAEC. Ft Monmouith, ATTN: AMSEL-CT-HDF

I HODA IDAMI-DOT-C) 1 USAEC. Ft Monmouth, ATTN- AMSEL-PA-P

I NODA (DAPC PMZ-AI I USAEC. Ft Monmout, ATTN- AMSEL-SI-CS

I HODA (OACNPPZ-A) 1 USAEC. Ft Monmouth,. ATTN C. Foci Dev Sr

1 OA (DAPEl-HRE) I USA Maerials Sys Anal Agcv, Abordieen ATTN: AMXSYI OVA IDAPE MPO-C) 1 Eclgwoood Arsenal. Aberdeen. ATTN: SAREA-eOL-H

I NOVA IDAPEDOW) 1 USA Ord Ctr & Sen. Aberdeen. ATTN: ATSL-TEM-C

1 NOOA (DAPE-HRLI 2 USA Hum Engr Lab. Aberdeen. ATTN Lib-aerv/Dir

1 NODA (OAPE-CPS) 1 USA Combat Arms Trig Sd, Ft Berining, ATTN: Ad Supeirvisor

I OA (DAFD-MFAI 1 USA Infanry" Hum Rich Unit. Ft Banning, ATTN: Chief

1 OA IDARD-ARS-P) 1 USA Infantry Sd. Ft Banning. ATTN- STESC-TE-T

1 NODA ODAPC.PA.S.AI I USASMA. Ft Bliss. ATTN: ATSS-LRC

I HOOA (DUSA-ORI 1 USA Air Del Sd,, Ft Bliss. ATTN: ATSA--CTD-ME

I NODAD(AMO-ROR) I USA Air Del Sch. Ft Bliss, ATTN: T"t L~b

I NODA DOASGI 1 USA Air Def Sd. Ft Sliss. ATTN: FILES

I HODA DAD-PII 1 USA Air Delf Sd. Ft Bliss, ATTNi STESO-PoO

I Chief, Consult Div iDA-OTSGI, Adeiph, MO 1 USA Cmd & General Stf College, Ft Leavenworth. ATTN' Lob

I Mil Asst. Hum Res. ODDR&E. DAD (E&LS) I USA Crnd & Genearal Stf College, Ft Leavenworth, AT TN. ATSW-SE-L

I NO USARAL. APO Seattle, ATTN: ARAGP R 1 USA Cmd & General Stt College. Ft Leavenworth. ATTN! Ed Advisor

1 NQ First Army, ATTN: AFKA-01-TI 1 USA Combined Arms Cm.bt Dev Act. Ft Leavenwoorth. ATTN. DepCdr

2 HO Fifth Army. Ft San Houston I USA Combined Arms Cmbt Dey Act, Ft Leavernoorim. ATTN: CCS

I Dir. Army Stf Studies Ofc. ATTN: OAVCSA (DSPI 1 USA Combined Arms Cmbt Deor Act. Ft Leavenworth,. ATTN: ATCASA

I Oft: Chief of Srf. Studies Ofc 1 USA Comnbined Arms Cmbt Day Act. Ft Leavenworth. ATTN: ATCACO-E

I DCSPER. ATTN: CPS/OCP I USA Combined Arms Cmbt Des Act. Ft Leavenworth. ATTN: ATCACC-i

1 The Army Lob. Pentagon. ATTN: RSS Chief 1 USAECDM. Nighit Vision Lab. Ft Selvoir. ATTN. AMSEL-NV-SD

I The Army Lo, Pentagon. ATTN. ANRAL 3 USA Cormputer Sys Cmd. Ft Selvoir. ATTN. Tech Library

1 Dfc. Asst Sect of -he Army IR &D) 1 USAMERDC. Ft Selivoir. ATTN. STSFS-OQ

I Tecth Support 011c, OJCS 1 UISA Eng S, Ft Selvoir. ATTN: Library

1 USASA. Arlington. ATTN. IARO.T I USA Topographic Lab. Ft Selvoir. ATTN. ETL-TD-S

1 USA Rsch Ofc. Durham. ATTN. Life Sciences Dir I USA Topographic Lao. Ft Seloir, ATTN. STINFO Center

2 USARIEM. Natick. ATTN. SGRD-UE-CA 1 USA Topographic Lab. Ftr Seivoir, ATTN. ETL-GSL

1 USATTC. Ft Clayton. ATTN. STETC-MO-A I USA Intelligence Ctr & Sd'. Ft Huacftuca. ATTN. CTD-MS

I USAIMA. Ft Bragg, ATTN. ATSU.CTD-OM I USA Intelligence Ctr & Sd'. Ft Huachuca. ATTN. ATS-CTD-MiS

I USAIMA, Ft SrMg ATTN. Maittuat Lib 1 USA intelligence Ctr & S, Ft Nuachuca. ATTN. ATSI-TE

I US WAC Ctr &Sch. Ft McClellan, ATTN: Lib 1 USA Intulligence Car & Sc,Ft Hucnuc, ATTN: ATSI-TEX --GS

1 US WAC Ctr & Sch, Ft McClellan. ATTN. Trig Dir 1 USA Intelligence Ctr & Seh. Ft Nuacluca. ATTN. ATSI-,CTS-OR

1 USA Quartermaster Sd'. Ft Lee. ATTN. ATSM-TE I USA Intelligence Ctr & Sch. Ft Huechuca. ATTN. ATSI-CTO-OT

IIntelligence Material Dan Ofc. EWL. Ft Nolabird 1 USA Intelligence Ctr & Sd'. Ft Huachuca. ATTN. ATSI-CTD-CS

1 USA SE Signal Scht. Ft Gordon. ATTN. ATSO-EA 1 USA Intelligence Ctr & Sd,, Ft Nuachuca. ATTN. DASiSRD

1USA Chalaien Ctr & Sd,. Ft Hamilton. ATTN. ATSC-TE-RO 1 USA Intelligence Cr & Sd'. Ft Huachuca. ATTN. ATSI-TEM

1 USATSCH. Ft Eustis, ATTN. Educ Advisor 1 USA intelligence Ctr & S, Ft Nueachuca. ATTN. Library

1 USA War College. Carlisle Barracks. ATTN. Lib 1 CDR, HOD Ft Huachuco, ATTN: Tech Ref Div

2 WRAIR. Nesropsychiatry Die 2 CDR, UISA Electronic Prvg Gird, ATTN. STEEP-MT-S

I DLI. SOA. Monterey 1 HO. TCATA. ATTN: Tedh Library i I USA Concept Anval Agcy. Sertiseada. ATTN. MOCA-UR 1 NO. TCATA. ATTN. AT CAT-OP-V. Ft Hood

I USA Concept Anal Agcy. Bethesda. ATTN. MOCA-JF 1 USA Recruiting Cmid. Ft Sheridai, ATTN. USARCPM-P

I USA Arctic Teat Ctr. APO Seatrtle. ATTN. STEAC-PL-MI 1 Senior Army Adv., USAFAGOC/TAC. Elgin AF Auxi Fid No. 9

I USA Arctic Teat Ctr. APO Seattle. ATTN. AMSTE-PL-TS I HO. USARIPAC. DCSPER. APO SFP 96556. ATTN. GPPE-SE

1 USA Armament Cmd, Redstone Aend. ATTN. ATSK.TEM 1 Stimston Lib. Academy of Health Sciences. Ft Sam Nosaton

1 USA Armament Cmd. Rock Island, ATTN. AMSAR-TDC 1 Marine Corps Inst., ATTN. Dean-MCI

I FAA-NAFEC. Atlantic City. ATTN. Library t HO. USMC. Commandant. ATTN. Code MTMT

1 FAA.NAFEC. Atlantic City, ATTN. Human Engr Br 1 NO. USMC. Commieandnt. ATTN. Code MPI .20-28

1 FAA Aeronautical Ctr. Oklahoma City, ATTN. AAC4A0 2 USCG Acaedemy.v Now London. ATTN. Admission

2 USA Fid Arty Sch. Ft Sill. ATTN. Library 2 USCG Academy. New London. ATTN: Library,

I USA Armor Sd'. Ft Knox. ATTN. Library 1 USCG Training Ctr. NY, ATTN. CO

1 USA Armor Sch, Ft K~nox. ATTN- ATSS.DI-E I USCG Training Ctr. NY. ATTN. Educ Svc Oft:

1 USA Armor S, Ft Knox. ATTN- ATSO-DT TP I USCG. Pawychol Ross Sr. DC. ATTN. GP 1/62

1 USA Armor Sch. Ft K~nox. ATTN. ATSS.CD-AD 1 HO Mid-Range Sr. MC Det. Oantico, ATTN P6.5 Div

31

p~KflJjQ BLANK - O EI
I QS Mfarne Corol L a~so'r Ofc. AMC ALexan,a, ATTN AMCGS-r S 0 E'l' ,,ra

* JSAiRADOC Mri- e A-TN A-'q-ED AIR CRESS. Ke'w'gro" A'N inrfo Sill er

~ JS~ROO %' -c* ~T ATDR-AD A -eresrn Q,)enner'

* .SArRAQOC M'Xlr-oo ATTN ATr-SEA V* *-arv A~cl E-oess or-j ze, Sec

*USA ;O': ,c ro F, MfcPhersonr AT'TN L 013, E~f :' P''C A -a it'a, '*u @r3,,a, 9,"

.SA A.tso,, 'esl Bo f r vf AT-, * STESG-O 0 sce- - 01" Aw, -i 'qr 41cr' * z 

* SA Agcv 'or Aoiltion Safty Ft Ruc~ref AT-TN L Orarv - "S New' 00?r

USA 4qc lo, Ardr on Satervy Ft Ruckrer. ATTN 5u AidisOr 'ell ic t Otc L cocil AKA4 fiae. Celer'se r ,cr

jSA Avation Srn. ;t Ruackr, AT7N PO Drawe- 0 V~ astn, Ceftims-e DO KL A f0 50rC,44,

1 i4OUSA Al~atiof Svs Cind St Louis. ATr-. 'AMSAV-ZOR SCloioq5s.ie Zji n e-gu.e Neearrr:r

' iJSA Aiat'on Svi Test Act., Edwards AFS. ATTN SAVT5-T

IUSA Air ot 5cr'. Fr Bliss, ATTN: A TSA 1'EM

IUSA A-r Moodily Race & 0ev Lao,. '0off cr1 F, ArTN SAVOL- 4

1 UJSA A.,ation Scr. Res Trig Mgt, r Ru~cker, ATTN ATST-T-Rrm

I SA Aviation Schf. CO. Ft Rfucker ATTN. ATST-0--A

-I HO ARCOM. Alexarndria. ATTN AMXCO-~TL

IHO. DARCOM. Ailerrandr~a. ATTN. CDR

I US Military Academy. West Poinrt. ATTN: Serials Unit

1 US Military Acooemr,. West Point. ATTN: Ole of llt Ldrirro

I US Military Academ. West Poin, ATTNV: AIAOR

I USA Standardi.zation Go. UK, VRO NY. ATTN MiASE-GC

I Ofe of Navel Rictil. Arlington, ATTN Code 452

3 Otc of Navel Ricfr. Arlingqton, ATTN: Coat 458

t 0

1 c, of Niaval Ascir. Arlington, ATTN: Coave 450

1 0

1

c :if Noval Rvcrr. Arlington. A TTN Cod* 441

Naval Aerosilc Mell Res Lao. Pescl ATTN Acous Scfr D~v

Naval Aerovroc Med Aft Lab Penacola. ATTN. Cilde L51

Nlavar Aerosoc Med Res Lao. Pensacola. ATTN- Coat LS

I Chef of NavPemt ATTN Pr,.OR

I VAVA)RSTA. Norfolk. ATTN Safety Ctr

I Nair Oceartogaphic DC. AT TN2 Code 6251. Charts &Tec

I Cenrter of Naval An'al. ATTN: oc Ctr

INeroA.rSvsComr. ATTN AIR-5313C

7Nay BuMed. ATTN i13

I Neef~elcowoer~ub~qua~ 2.PO SF 96601

1 AFHRL iFT) William% AF8

I AFHRL CTT) Lovru'r AFS

I AFHAL iASI WPAFS. ON

2 AFHRL D042) Brookas AFS

!AFHAL i0OJN) Lackiend AF8

IHOUSAF (INYSOI

I HOIJSAF IOPXXAi

1A$FVTG Rlir Ranftloy AFB

3 AMRL (HEl WVAM 0OH

2 AF Iit of Tech, WPAF9. OH ArTN: ENE,SL

IATC tXPTO) Randolon AFS

I USAF AtroMed Lib,. 8rog, APE rSifL-41. ATTN. DOC SEC

I AFOSR iNillI. Arlington

I AF Lo Crld. McClellan AFS. ATTN. ALC,'DPCRB3

I Air Force Academy. CO. ATrTN: Dent of Bel Scr,

5 NAvporr & 0ev Ctr. San Diego

2 Nav'y Med Nerropsyclriatric Rsclr Unit. San Diego

7 Nov Efectronic Lab. Sao Oiliql, ATTN: Res Lab

!Nov TrngCen, San Diego. A rTN: Code 9000--i,

z NeiaPostQreSch. Morerey. ATTN: Code 56A#

I Nalr'ostGrlSich. Moriteorey ATTN7 Code 2124

1 NavTrrgfouipCtr. Orlando, ATTN: Tech Lib

I US Neot of Labor. DC. ATTN: Manodwor Adm~rr

1 US Dept of Justice, DC. ATTN: Drug Enforce Admin

I Nat Our of Standards. OC. ATTN: Coanouar Info Section

I Nat Clearnng House for MH-Info. Rockville

I Dernver Federal Ct,. Lakewood, ATTN: ELM

12 Defense Documentration Cenrter

4 Dir Psych.. Army Ho, Russell DOes. Canberra

SCerrrfC Advisr Md Sd. Army No, Russell 01cs. Canoorra

'Ail 3i'd Air Attachre, Austriarr Embassy

ICentro de Rechrerchre Des Facturs. Humaint do a0 Defense

Nationale Bru~ssels

2 Canadian Joint staff Washinrgton

7 C. Air Staff Royal Canadian AF, ATTN- bersy St Anal Sr

3 Chief Canradian Del 09tri Staff. ATTN -C,.CRDSIWI

A1 Britifi 0*4 Stalli British Ermoassay Washington

32
DAT

FILMEI

DIC